FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Gun control: "Church" firmly, quietly opposes firearms for civilians
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
It's the USCCB.

What else?
Do national conferences of bishops have any special teaching authority greater than that which the bishops have individually? I do not think so because of the Winnipeg Statement affair.
(01-15-2011, 10:57 AM)werdegast Wrote: [ -> ]That's followed by a footnote that states: "However, we believe that in the long run and with few exceptions -- i.e. police officers, military use -- handguns should be eliminated from our society."

That is stating an ideal. When the use of them is no longer useful, then it is true they should be eliminated. Same with nuclear weapons, government, etc.

When we live in an ideal world, we will be able to implement ideals. Until then...
(01-15-2011, 05:02 PM)Gladium Wrote: [ -> ]Do national conferences of bishops have any special teaching authority greater than that which the bishops have individually? I do not think so because of the Winnipeg Statement affair.
I might suggest that they have less authority than a local bishop.  But they exercise this authority (or at least try to) over more souls.

I could be wrong, but I don't think bishop's conferences are official structures within the hierarchy of the Church.


They see more recognition in the secular realm because they appear more important and give bishops some amount of muscle in secular politics.  I don't think this is necessarily a good thing
Quote: And he said to them: [35] When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, did you want anything?

[36] But they said: Nothing. Then said he unto them: But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a scrip; and he that hath not, let him sell his coat, and buy a sword.
There's definitely a right to self defense, lethal if necessary. That being said, I don't think it is an absolute right to be able to own a gun. It's also not intrinsically evil to do so.

I think this is one of those things that should be regulated more or less according to the needs of the common good. While the bishops have a duty to lay down the principles and have the right to advise what they think best contributes to the common good, the Church's authority over the temporal is only indirect. Ultimately, the authority and responsibility to make this decision belongs to the temporal authority.

(01-15-2011, 05:50 PM)James02 Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote: And he said to them: [35] When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, did you want anything?

[36] But they said: Nothing. Then said he unto them: But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a scrip; and he that hath not, let him sell his coat, and buy a sword.

I bought a sword.

However, a sword is not a firearm (yes, I know there are awkward hybrids).
(01-15-2011, 07:01 PM)SaintSebastian Wrote: [ -> ]There's definitely a right to self defense, lethal if necessary. That being said, I don't think it is an absolute right to be able to own a gun. It's also not intrinsically evil to do so.

I think there is a "right" for citizens of a nation to personally possess the common personal weapons of a given area and time period.

Ignore the USelessCCB. Ignore them, boycott them, take them with a grain of salt. :salt:

Their press releases and dissertations can be summed up by this:  :blah: :liar: :blah: :liar: :blah: :liar: They're irrelevant.
(01-15-2011, 01:57 PM)dark lancer Wrote: [ -> ]criminal personnel

That's awesome.  I'm going to steal it.
Pages: 1 2 3 4